Please revert 3eea8b5d68c801fec788b411582b803463834752 as it breaks touchscreen on n900.

[Dmitry Torokhov]

On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 10:27:40PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2015-06-01 10:47:30, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 05:21:11PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > > > > The 3eea8b5d68c801fec788b411582b803463834752 is just bad.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > You were very welcome to review this patch at the time and/or suggest
> > > > > > a fix that pleases everyone.
> > > > > 
> > > > > You should be the one that should suggest fixes, as you broke it in
> > > > > the first place. But clearly you don't understand that.
> > > > 
> > > > You actually never asked for a fix, and went head first calling this
> > > > patch "bad" and asking for nothing but reverting it.
> > > 
> > > Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 21:08:16 +0200
> > > Subject: 4.1 touchscreen regression on n900 -- pinpointed [was Re:
> > > linux-n900
> > > ...
> > > Maxime, can you suggest a fix?
> > 
> > How about we do something like below (it needs a small edt-ft5x06 fixup
> > that I'll send separately). Not tested.
> 
> +       data_present = touchscreen_get_prop_u32(np,
> "touchscreen-size-x",
> +
> input_abs_get_maximum(axis),
> +                                               &maximum) |
> +                      touchscreen_get_prop_u32(np,
> "touchscreen-fuzz-x",
> +
> input_abs_get_fuzz(axis),
> +                                               &fuzz);
> +       if (data_present)
> +               touchscreen_set_params(dev, axis, maximum, fuzz);
> 
> Umm. So you are changing behaviour from "whatever was there" to
> "input_abs_get_maximum"... in n900 case.o

That _is_ "whatever was there".

> Is that a good idea for a
> regression fix this late in release cycle?

As Maxime mentioned the new behavior is needed for other touchscreens.
Given that fixed DTS is going into 4.1 (as far as I understand) we do
not need to rush this change into 4.1.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry